Will Trump veto the Swamp bill ending internet privacy?

Personally, if Donald doesn't veto this, he'll have proven to me that he doesn't really care about the people.

Other urls found in this thread:

congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-joint-resolution/34
senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=115&session=1&vote=00094#top
dailycaller.com/2015/02/23/the-fccs-predictable-fiasco-of-internet-utility-regulation/
regblog.org/2014/03/05/05-tarbutton-fcc-ftc-merger/
wirelessweek.com/article/2017/02/flip-side-digging-trumps-ftc-pick-net-neutrality-privacy
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

If it's from Obama wouldn't that just make it more likely that Trump would veto it?

So I read the bill

congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-joint-resolution/34

It's exactly as fucking bad as everyone says it is, and you are a massive cuck.

Why would he. This is one of the most based bills he's passed yet.

>This joint resolution nullifies the rule [that] applies the customer privacy requirements of the Communications Act of 1934 to broadband Internet access service and other telecommunications services

Yup that sounds harmless to me. Shill.

Yeah, that's what they're getting rid of you fucking idiot.

Fucking blind sheep. Actually fucking read the bill cuck. It's spelled out in plain letters.


>This joint resolution nullifies the rule [that] applies the customer privacy requirements of the Communications Act of 1934 to broadband Internet access service and other telecommunications services

No. This isnt obama or hillarys fault. As much as you want to blame it on them. GOP sold you out you spineless cuck.

You are certifiably retarded.

>This joint resolution nullifies the rule submitted by the Federal Communications Commission entitled "Protecting the Privacy of Customers of Broadband and Other Telecommunications Services." The rule published on December 2, 2016: (...)


I.E.

WE ARE GETTING RID OF A RULE. THE RULE WE ARE GETTING RID OF IS:

And if he`d veto this, libshits would just be "oh it`s fucking nothing".

>Voting Republican ever

You guys are so retarded.

>WASHINGTON — White House press secretary Sean Spicer indicated President Trump plans to sign a bill that would wipe out some of the Federal Communications Commission’s Internet privacy protections, but declined to discuss the reasons for supporting the legislation at his daily briefing on Wednesday.

All the Republicans in the senate voted for this except for two who abstained, and all the Democrats voted against it, so there's no way he's vetoing it.

senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=115&session=1&vote=00094#top

Reminder that Trump is also against net neutrality even though he doesn't seem to know what it is.

Yes, the world would just fall apart if we didn't have liberal retards like you.

>Declined to discuss the reasons for supporting the legislation.

He knows it's the thing that people pay him to not like.

Deleting the post wont fix your stupidity.

>Have you read the bill and it actually doesn't change much. It is a bill Obama signed in. Go read it and come back u POS hater. Go have sex with your sister again.

who in here is deleting they post shakin my head family

Haha you actually reposted his post. Absolute madman.

He said there would be a reason given when he signs it.

wondered if Sup Forums would be willing to talk about this, not shocked at all that suddenly nobody wants to tell me how great Trump is

>taking credit for clean water and weekends
Liberalism, not even once

I can't wait for this. I'm betting it will be something about ISIS using the cyber to recruit people and then go into a rant.

Would nearly bet money on it. His other bills were kinda memey. This one just has the smell of money all over it.

i hope you have some clues to labor history if you are going to talk shit to the left's claim on basically everything nice an employer has ever "given" you

The amount of liberal salt from this gives me a semi. I swear if he institutes national ccw reciprocity and national voter id laws I'm going to bust an ocean of nuts.

1910 = america started
1930 = great depression started
1940 = fdr and new deal started, no one is starving anymore and everyone has jobs and is paid well
1950 = eisenhower and roads started, perfect age for young government workers
1960 = kennedy and civil rights started, golden age of america, all humans treated equal
1970 = nixon and first problems started, but government still pretty good overall
1980 = reagan started and government began to end
2000 = bush started, some crappy year all of our safeties and freedoms began to go away
2010 = obama started, you gotta be kidding me this ain't real government
2016 = trump defeats sanders, RIP good government and roads and food

To be fair the EPA has done tremendous things for clean water around america. You should reports about what water standards were like when it was initially founded. By Nixon no less. It was one of the best things he ever done as a president.

Every since then Republicans have been trying to kill it because fossil fuel companies don't dump their waste in rich people's water supplies so they don't give a fuck. As long as that money keeps coming in.

The EPA does a great job of polluting water.

>the left's claim on basically everything nice an employer has ever "given" you
henry ford paid the highest wages of any employer in recorded history. spare me your retarded leftist gobbledygook

The FCC having regulatory power over the behavior of ISPs was widely derided for years, and Trump's people at the FTC want to use competition, rather than regulation, to drive down costs and improve consumer outcomes.

dailycaller.com/2015/02/23/the-fccs-predictable-fiasco-of-internet-utility-regulation/
regblog.org/2014/03/05/05-tarbutton-fcc-ftc-merger/
wirelessweek.com/article/2017/02/flip-side-digging-trumps-ftc-pick-net-neutrality-privacy

>FCC stripped of regulatory powers over the internet
>as part of this, an Obama-era regulation banning ISPs selling customer data is rescinded
>[MSM chimpout here]
>power being given to the FTC instead
>FTC believes in competition rather than regulations at gunpoint to lower prices and increase performance
>ISPs pic related

The FTC plan is not up to their whimsical discretion like the FCC plan is. Obama sabataged shit in order to make it look horrible taking away his plan to censor the internet. This is one of those pitfalls left behind to make anyone repealing it look bad.

The FTC will create an actual ruleset; unlike the FCC where they can just decided behind closed doors what they do and don't want. This also eases shit on the private sector where uncertainty fucks shit up. This is another dynamic obama and the dems installed -- uncertainty. FCC can do whatever they want. FTC will have a set in stone rule set everyone can understand so there will be no uncertainty in the private sector.

Meanwhile, the dem plan to censor conservative and alternative news falls apart. That is the goal of this movement by the republicans.

tl;dr ITS FUCKING NOTHING

/thread

No not /thread.

This is stripping away government oversight and handing it to a corporation.

(And we all know corporations have our best interests at heart. >I'maretard.jpg)

You just admitted it yourself. Stop being a sheep and covering their asses. Stop fucking blaming obama on everything aswell. It gets tiring.

Trump sold you out. Now stop being a cuck and call your fucking representative if you value your Internet privacy.

Thank you user. I capped your explanation.

I didn't know the FTC is a corporation now.

A reasonable explanation besides hysterical rambling? Have a (you) good sir.

Comcast, Google, facebook, and others are all corporations under the FTC and they're all going to profit massively from this.

Regardless of semantics you're allowing your private information to be bought and distributed. Put partisanship aside. Put trump aside.

This is not a good bill. Money exchanged hands on this.

Trump said he would sign. Enjoy

>FCC stripped of regulatory powers over the internet
>as part of this, an Obama-era regulation banning ISPs selling customer data is rescinded
No, not 'as part of this', that's the entirety of the bill. To do nothing but strike out those regulations related to customer privacy.

>power being given to the FTC instead
Point to me where in the bill it says that regulation of ISPs is being handed over to the FTC

You didn't read the bill, did you?

that's not what is happening at all though, the bill specifically disproves of that one particular rule. Congress isn't moving us from a FCC to FTC system they are just saying the FCC isn't going to be permitted to enforce that rule.

The laughable reasoning given by multiple GOP members defending their vote was that isp's were at too much of an unfair disadvantage compared to say google if they were forced to ask consumer's to opt in to being tracked.

shit like this
>Obama sabataged shit in order to make it look horrible taking away his plan to censor the internet.

is pure tinfoil hat territorry

also what whimsical discretion? You act as if the entire net neutrality order is being undone.

ITS NOT. Literally one rule, that wasn't whimsical or random but specifically states that isps have to have an opt in from consumers to collect a very certain set of personal data from them is being stopped before it takes effect.

Because its the type of regulation that once it takes effect even GOP voters would notice it and be happy it was there and mad if it was taken away just so the isps could make a few more bucks, which is the only reason this shit is going down

If there was ever anything all of Sup Forums could agree on, it should be that this bill is a fucking nightmare. No matter who you voted for, this is objectively awful.

I wouldn't put it past Trump to sign it onto law, though. "Can someone make money because of it? Then it's okay by me and I don't care who it hurts" has kinda been his mantra so far.

Who would be stupid enough to vote for people like that I wonder?

think we can get a petition on this?

except that Nixon created the EPA

I'm sure one already exists, and is being handily ignored. The best reaction I've seen is an attempt to crowdfund the purchase and release of the internet histories of everyone who voted for it. Poetic justice, but it won't prevent it from happening in the first place.

One of the two reasonings behind this move is that the FCC does not have jurisdiction to implement, let alone enforce, this rule. Guess who does?

Hint: the FTC

American federal politics is fucking garbage

On one hand you have the Dems going
>See? We blocked the pipelines. We're saving the environment! Who's Warren Buffet? :-)

Then you have the GOP
>See? We got rid of those regulations that impacted the mega corporations that are lobbying to us. We're so free market!

He won't veto it.

But the bill is being sensationalized by the MSM. It's not anti-privacy. The point of the bill is to leave consumer protection and privacy regulations to the Federal Trade Commission, so they can establish a comprehensive framework that everyone has to adhere to, rather than having the FCC enforce arbitrarily strict regulations on ISPs only.

Another problem is that ad networks like doubleclick and Google Analytics which show up on every website ever are already tracking your browsing history and selling it without your consent or knowledge. They are violating your privacy left and right, so it doesn't really make sense to say that ISPs aren't allowed to profit from your browsing history but websites are. The bill is just for ISPs to be able to play on the same field as the websites they're providing access to.

It's not from Obama. It overturns a different bill from Obama's administration. The Obama bill had its issues, but this is worse as it doesn't return the privacy control to the FTC.

This entire bill is a removal of one of the FCC's responsibilities.

If petitions don't work then we'll have to escalate. How soon can we get a protest in D.C.?

except the FTC literally doesn't have jurisdiction at all, feel free to google any of the many articles that cover how its really unclear how the FTC can claim jurisdiction over any isp the way things are now.

Its not a reasoning its a pretend justification. Otherwise they would be tackling the entire system not just this rule.

How about they ban everyone from selling such info, including Google before removing this law

It's anti-privacy no matter how you spin it

>Another problem is that ad networks like doubleclick and Google Analytics which show up on every website ever are already tracking your browsing history and selling it without your consent or knowledge.

That's where you're wrong bucko

It is pretty much a clear sign that most of the people hanging out these parts, despite all their heated rhetoric, don't have a clue. This place should be going nuts about this. Who the fck asked for this? Only benefits a bunch of rich media barons.

Maybe I'm wrong here, but I read that the bill DOESN'T return control of privacy regulations to the FTC. Can you source that they'll be back in control? If that's the case, I'm all for this. Otherwise it's shit.

as sad as it is, i don't feel it's very surprising after trump put that disgusting fcc chairman

>Google, facebook
>ISPs

nobody can source that because this bill, which is so short that anyone can read it in 5min, doesn't do anything of the sort.

do some people who support/drafted it espouse the view that the FCC shouldn't have anything to do with this instead of the FTC?

yes they do. but that's about as generous as you can be with the actual facts

After posting, I suddenly remembered Google Fiber and how I'll never get it.

More bending over backwards to try justify this bullshit.

It's not comparable to Google analytics or Facebook, since ISPs collect significantly more information than websites do.

Here are some things that were protected by the law that are now up for grabs to ISPs and whoever they want to sell this information to:

>financial information, health information, Social Security numbers, precise geo-location information, information pertaining to children, content of communications, web browsing history, application usage history, and the functional equivalents of web browsing history or application usage history

And you're saying this isn't anti-privacy.

Even if this data is anonymized to buyers, the simple act of collecting it and storing it is a hack waiting to happen.

You say the point of the bill is to leave consumer protection to the FTC, which is funny because there has been no mention whatsoever of the FTC taking up the protections removed by this bill.

This combined with a anti net neutrality FCC is part of a massive attack on user privacy and further corporatization of the internet.

Yeah, I just read it. I didn't realize it was basically two sentences. So the only effect here is that we go back to the old privacy protections and that the FTC is in charge of enforcing them? I guess I don't really see the problem, then.

Only use an ISP that states in their contract they won't sell your info. Let the market decide.

Also not using a VPN to secure your traffic.

The original FCC bill cites both the FTC's jurisdiction and the FCC's displeasure with the FTC's actions, which they provided as reasoning for issuing the ruling back in December and effectively usurping jurisdiction.

I understand its a long fucking read (the FCC's ruling), but jesus christ read the fucking things you try to come off as experts on.

This shilling campaign is outrageous

This bill doesn't let people buy your Internet hostory.

Remember those shitty articles about "which state Google what the most"? The bill Trump is repealing bans that. Nobody can buy your Internet history and actually see that what you're doing, just which sites see what from towns and states in general.

For fuck's sake, he's repealing a bill from 2016. You had fine rights in 2015 before it was made.

It's clear Sup Forums is filled with faggots who don't care about the internet. I'd suggest informing Sup Forums about this shit too

I'm not pretending to be an expert on any of it. Hence why I'm fishing for discussion in this thread. Everyone is making this bill out as if we're being left with no privacy regulations. As far as I can tell, this bill just puts things back the way they were a couple months ago. The FTC already had privacy protections in place. It seems like a non-issue. Maybe I'm missing something?

>these members of congress
>senator john "songbird" mccain

Conservatives are paint drinking inbreds. What do you expect?

congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-joint-resolution/34
>(2) requires telecommunications carriers to inform customers about rights to opt in or opt out of the use or the sharing of their confidential information

Says it right there. Not only does the carrier (ISP) have the right to collect information on customers, they also don't have to tell their customers about it.

The problem is that you can't install ublock origin or some other adblocker on your router for example. There are measures to prevent websites from tracking your data. An ISP doing this is a COMPLETELY different front. For once please stop trying to glorify this bill.

This post gave me cancer.

bump

all they did is repeal a silly 78 page (((regulation))) like trump said he would from the beginning

Wtf I love my ISP now

He'll throw a bone to the fucking shit Republicans and sign it.

Can't wait for whoever is going to purchase Congress' browsing history and publish it.

>one of the first things Trump does is repeal net neutrality and gives more power and money to jews

My sides. 4 more years!

We already know they monitor our browsing. That's not new. The average peasant has nothing to hide.

If certain law enforcement officials learn of criminal activity through this monitoring, especially involving high level government officials, they cannot prosecute because it's illegal for them to know of this criminal activity.

Which in my opinion is a really stupid fucking problem to have.

I'm assuming they are putting this bill through so that they can actually use evidence they already have. Just a guess. The fact that the media is so against it makes me think that's exactly what's going on.